The price is right: Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review

Key Features

18MP APS-C CMOS sensor

9-point autofocus system

1080/30p video capture

Fixed 3" 920k-dot LCD

ISO 100-6400, expandable to 12800

3 fps burst shooting

Wi-Fi with NFC

The Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D is an entry-level DSLR targeted toward first-time ILC users and smartphone upgraders. Built around an 18MP APS-C sensor, the T6 offers Wi-Fi with NFC for easy photo sharing when you’re out-and-about, and adds a faster processor compared to its predecessor, the Rebel T5.

Its closest competitor in the category is the Nikon D3300, which was announced in January 2014 and is getting a little long in the tooth at this point.

As per Rebel tradition, the T6 packages up some tech borrowed from previous-generation higher end models, and that's no bad thing. It offers a 9-point AF module, 1080/30p video and built-in Wi-Fi with NFC. Battery life is a very respectable 500 shots per charge, putting it near the top of its class in that respect. But one of the T6's headline features isn't on the inside of the camera at all, it's written on the outside of the box: that sweet $500 price tag with lens.

The T6 is better tuned to a beginner's needs and hits an aggressively low price point

Offering tech handed down from previous generations at a very reasonable price is what the Rebel line has traditionally done best. The original Digital Rebel is just about 13 years old, and was essentially a single-dial 10D in a plastic body, priced at $1000 with kit lens - a breakthrough price-point for DSLRs at the time. As well as being cheaper still, the T6 is a vastly more capable camera than that pioneering Rebel, and better tuned to a beginner's needs.

In short, with the T6, Canon has gathered up various components it had lying around on the shelf from Rebels past and put them together in an aggressively priced bundle. Smart business move for Canon, but is it the best way to spend your $500? Read on.

I wouldn't mind the 18 MP sensor. It's the measly 9-point AF and the glacial 3 fps that would be deal breakers for me. Spend just a little more on the T6i, and you'll get a lot more camera. The T7i is even better and yet still under $1000 with a 2-lens kit.

A $500 price might make this not much of a deal but I purchased a T6 w/18-55mm lens for $350 (not grey market or refurb) and it seemed like a bargain. I gave it to a budding p/t photographer as his first "real" camera

Why this camera is too much overpriced in US market contrary to other electronic items? I had ordered this same camera with two kit lenses (Canon EOS 1300D EF-S 18 - 55 mm IS II + EF-S 55 - 250 mm F4 5.6 IS II) for my brother in law in India through an online retailer there and I paid only 28699 Indian rupees inclusive of all taxes and freight (about 430 USD). The camera comes with 2 years replacement warrenty by Canon India. my bro-in-law talked very high about the camera and I decided to buy the same for my wife. But here in US the same camera with only one lens (18-55 mm) costs 499 USD plus tax being the total cost about 540 USD. I double checked the Indian website and the same item is still available there at the same price (https://www.flipkart.com/canon-eos-1300d-ef-s-18-55-mm-ii-250-f4-5-6-dslr-camera/p/itmehc5jwagwe7ep?pid=CAMEHC5JY6E4HJSU&srno=s_1_1&otracker=search&lid=LSTCAMEHC5JY6E4HJSUQRW4JE&qH=c034accbf50af3e1) but they don't ship outside India. Very disappointed

As a beginner in photography I have to say that the most useful feature for learning is the live view and EVF.

My experience with D-SRL and Mirror less cameras:I had borrowed a Canon 500D and it was my first time using a photo camera. So for exposure I had to set my F no and ISO no and Shutter speed at a random guess, not knowing anything about them at that time. Most of the pictures were either over exposed or under exposed. After o few unsuccessful shots I took one picture in P mode , looked at what ISO, F and S speed the camera chose and replicated in manual mode. That was my experience with a D-SRL.

After that I decided to buy a mirror less camera, model Sony a6000. And making exposure was a lot easier. I was able to see on the screen or on the EVF the exact impact of changing the F stop, ISO and Shutter speed and what I saw on the screen is what I was getting when taking a picture. I think this is the best and most useful feature for a beginner in photography.

I wish canon would release a successor to the 100D/ SL1 instead of this. That one was a pretty good camera, and nicer than this. Not to mention very light (in weight and in cost) and great in quality. The weight and size is great for people like me with small hands and it's perfect for traveling. And it's better than the four digit 1xxxD series. At nearly the same cost. Why can't they continue the 100D / SL1 line instead of this?

No praise allowed for the D3300 here as the lack of the previously mentioned Wi-Fi relegates it to the lower leagues.You also risk being called to account for messages actually attributed to another poster!

9 out of 11 AF points being cross type is pretty nice, but what lenses make that feature come alive? That's an honest question. I have a T1i and I think the lens needs to be opened to f2.8 or better.

51k ISO? ROFL. What's the actual USABLE top end ISO?

@BarnET: why do many folks seem to think sensor cleaning is the best thing since sliced bread? I never had a problem with specks showing up on the XT or XTi (can't remember what one I had). But yeah, don't why it was an "option delete" on the T6. And dynamic range, who cares? The VAST majority of users in this range will have people looking at their photos on a blown out monitor anyway.

Not telling anyone what to buy, but a dose of reality needs to be added to paper specs. Sure, the T6 should be cheaper and Pentax has a lot of room to grow. But if that's what you're going for the body is only one part of a big equation you need to be looking at.

Any DSLR is capable of nice pictures, even my Canon 1000d from 2007 ... But if I was buying new DSLR now, I'd probably skip Canon and go for Pentax k-s2 , mainly because of better viewfinder.. All Rebel series is somehow small tunnel like view, since the first digital Rebel/300d from 2003 the size and coverage didnt improve....

But you CAN NOT FIND Pentax in Wal-Mart, Costco, Sams Club, Target or Best Buy. A better camera WILL LOSE everytime without effective advertizing and distribution... and WE ALL KNOW this Canon entry is a mass-produced piece of crap with 10 year old sensor and lens technology.

I was hoping they'd go with the newer ADC on-chip to improve the sensor, but I guess that along with things like dual-pixel AF cost money. $500 list for even an entry level DSLR is not a bad deal and the target market will likely be very pleased with the deal.

Honestly. I rather buy a 5 year old mirrorless than this. It's hard to believe that a giant like canon release a new camera like this 2016. It's nothing new and they could have had made this five years ago and still sold it. This is only for people who want the brand. At dslr's pentax is shining.

@BarnetI'm sure he does but is the target buyer likely to be aware, or be interested in fitting other manufacturers lenses with adaptors even if he does? With your undoubted expertise and knowledge you are obviously in a very different sector of the market than those this product is aimed at.

This is the point, and you describe my purchase path exactly :-) I am using an 1100d. The review was good, and your post extracted the point: buy this camera, and you have an easy pathway to becoming a photographer, with the fewest obstacles in your way. I'm not sure what set the haters off - the camera got a pretty low score, right? Anyway, great post!

@BarnetThis product is typical of a product that is in its maturity stage. Some might even argue that DSLRs in general are in their decline stage but perhaps that's another discussion for another day.Anyway whether you consider automobiles, watches, DVD Players, fax machines, laptops or even commercial aircraft, many 'new' models are essentially only face-lifts or re skins of older models. Of course they use 'old' parts. But If people really want a product that is in the introduction stage they should be prepared to pay a premium for that. Many people are not as concerned as some of us seem to be at having the latest camera technology - they simply want a good product at a price they are prepared to pay.

@BarnetWhose point? Yours? Fair enough if that's your opinion but I suspect the many hundreds of thousands of people who will happily buy this product will disagree with you. Or are they simply the ignorant masses?

This sensor was mature enough years ago.It is exactly the same sensor!Sony a6000 and a6300 are both 24mp sensors but they are different sensors.Sony added new focus points on its a6300.(I am not into megapixel here)Beside sensor itself,AF sensor of this "new" Canon is also very old.

Too many things are said about DR of Canon sensor.So I don't want to repeat them here.But 9-point AF system3 fps burst shooting1080/30p videoI agree with BarnET!

And you criticized his comment,by writing his name.Of course it is his own point and there are many other people or forums who agree with him.

All these mean you can not take good photos with this camera? Of course you can.But the problem is the mentality of the company!

Will sell like candy, i know a bunch of people having 600D, 1100D, 1200D, 100D. Also 600D is a 4-5 year old DSLR and last year it was still available. Several people bought it because it was affordable.(i'm from europe)

OK, not the most interesting camera in the world, but the review does seem somewhat light on detail. Some thoughts on enhancing this short format: - photos of the front, top and back showing (and possibly explaining) controls are useful and would make this format of review more helpful. - a bit more on autofocus speed - like some sort of measurement.and I'm sure there could be a few other useful bits that wouldn't take long to do....

No, I'm not thinking of buying one, but when I was looking for a basic DSLR (I bought a Pentax K50 in the end) I'd have found this review too 'vanilla' - but hey, maybe that's what was intended?

Guys, make all the plaintive comments you want but this just a mass market camera at a reasonable price that will be available almost everywhere and is aimed at people who want an easy life. When you start waffling on about comparisons with other products that aren't even on their radar, or using eye fi cards instead, you have simply missed the point of this product and have certainly not understood who the target audience is. That target audience is probably not you but that's not something to feel threatened by.

As much as I am sure it pains you, think of it as being the white goods of the camera market. Would you also get this anal about your fridge or microwave?

If you really don't like this product I have a simple solution for you - don't buy it.

Bleating about it on DPR is going to have zero effect anyway, the target market will never read your words of wisdom and anyway would give you a blank look worthy of Homer Simpson if they did.

I think the main problem is why did DPR even bother reviewing the camera? This is a site about gear and very few people who read this site are interested in such a low end camera. There are cameras available for only 2-3 hundred dollars more that are much better.

Exactly, this is like the "toaster" of a camera for the folks who consider it as just another appliance that need to perform its function sufficiently (check). i.e. toast some bread, aka take some pictures.

Just as they don't care how the bread turns out to be perfectly golden brown (IQ anyone?), they just eat it! Same for pictures, not perfect but the cat looks alright on it.

Arrogant? Maybe but people should keep their priorities straight. There was a time in my life where I was flat broke and didn't buy anything I didn't need until I was back on my feet. I guess I think others should do the same.

@tbcassThey don't need to be flat broke to make that choice. Perhaps it's just a case of their own particular priorities, i.e. do they wish to spend $2-300 more on a camera which isn't a priority to them. As enthusiasts we might wish to spend as much as we can on a camera but this camera isn't aimed at enthusiasts.

People buying DSLR generally do it for the OVF. I personally do not care about tilting/rotating LCD on a DSLR as I rarely use live view... If I want to use live view (and thus shoot with extended arms), I grab a smaller, lighter mirrorless camera.

The kit lens on this lowly DSLR will produce better photos than the compromised zoom lenses on many "high-end" or "enthusiast" compact cameras and at a much better price point. Is it really a surprise that these things sell well?

Not true. For instance, take the Lens from a LX100 Lumix, which is very good, and worlds faster from Aperture. Or take an now very old Samsung EX1, the cam is from 2010 - and the lens is also fast, and considered to be very good (Schneider-Kreuznach).

@marc petzoldLX100 is 2.2x crop camera, so its lens is effectively 24-75/3.7-6.2, probably F4 or F4.5 at 28~29mm (which is F5.6 on 18-55). Which is nice, but not otherworldly :).And the EX1 (4.6x crop) got 24-72/8.3-11, nothing to brag about in 2016 :)

@ecka84And i know all of this - and since these cameras have been introduced - so what's "new" here about it? I care not about which year it is - nice pictures it does make, you must learn, young Jedi. :)

@marc petzoldThe LX100 lens may go to 24mm but stops short at 70mm. It is all of 2/3 of a stop faster than this kit lens in 35mm equivalent terms and is otherwise nothing special. The DPR review samples are pretty telling. The EX1 is a historical relic at this point. Now let's see you try and find another example. No historical relics, please.Perhaps you're not very familiar with this kit lens from Canon, as it's just a "kit" lens. Have a look at its review at Photozone. Personally, I'm not at all surprised why these cameras sell well. They offer an incredible value proposition at $500. Those who don't get basic matters confused by a couple of "enthusiast" ergonomics bits and a "fast" lens thrown at them can evidently see that.

@dpr4bbyou are joking, right?! This "kitlens" sold with the 1300D is the very old (and cheap) canon 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS II, which is inferior -and way older- than the already 3 year old 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM, which i do own & use.

Remember, these beginners DLSR are being used mostly by JPEG only shooters...then they suddenly discover RAW, and doing it better, buy a telephoto, or UWA lens, prime, etc.

PS: I do know & respect photozone, and buying my lenses >= 10 years at their advice...so, nothing really new you tell me. :) It's only, that 1st timers can get such a much better deal in terms of quality / price to performance ratio - if they'd choose for example nikon or pentax.

Good light,marc

...and if the EX1 is for you "historical" , what are SLRs & lenses from the 60-80's for you? "pre-historic"?

Photoshoped? lol no. just a few tweaks in contrast and saturation, basically to a single RAW file using LIghtroom only. Yes 0.7mp only, if you want more pay for it. Btw i was agreeing with you when i made that comment but whatever, it's fun to see calling other people photos "snpashots" when your flickr account is full of cat photos which barely have any fave.

Just saying that you don't really need a DSLR for an image like that.Some few photoshop tweaks is photoshopping nevertheless.The image is fine, but it doesn't advocate for the lens, because it was photoshopped and it's just too small. When an image covers 1/12 of my screen, I call it a snapshot. Maybe it's not the exactly right definition for it, sorry.

I agree KS2 is a "MUCH BETTER" camera. However, Canon is "MUCH BETTER LENS" + Cheaper Price + Greater Availability, and most of all, greater RESELL. If I buy a Pentax KS2 (as good as it is), I'm stuck with it for life, since there is zero resell market for Pentax gears. Where as I can buy a Canon today, and resell it for $200~$300 after 2 years of usage.

The problem is you can not find pentax at best buy, costco and other similar stores and that kills it right then and there.Having a good distribution network seems as important, if not more, than making good quality cameras.

Agree. If I'm buying just a single gadget point/shoot, then the superior camera wins. In this case, Pentax wins hands down over Canon, Nikon.

But when I'm buying a DSLR / iLC, I have to factor in the "entire system" behind it:(1) plethora of lens (2) quiet-video-lens (3) availability, can buy it anyways (4) world-wide service & repair (5) etc..... While Canon T6 is an inferior camera compare to the competition, its is however, a cheap Entry into the entire Canon System. That is why canon T6, inspite of its lack of specs, will still outsold any Pentax out there.

Hi 007peter, for a number of years I've been using and upgrading my Pentax (and Olympus) cameras and reselling my older models on ebay without problems (K20D, K5 and KS2). There is another couple of points to consider. When you start with high quality, well specified cameras you tend to keep them longer skipping several new models before upgrading. Also, modern digital cameras have reached a high level of maturity and are now more competent than most photographers. I tend to keep my cameras ever longer. With the Pentax K5, I did not find the K5II and K3 worthy of an upgrade. Last year, I bought an (awesome) Oly E-M5II and I just pre-ordered the Pentax K70. Both cameras have more features that I can use and are built very well with long life shutters. I doubt that I'll feel the need to upgrade for a good number of years preferring to spend my money in lenses.

Hi, in my 50 years of photography I have worked with more than 40 different cameras from almost all the current and old brands, including Canon and Nikon. You can't touch Canikon for their overall systems but today there are very valid alternatives from other manufacturers. Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic and Sony (not a complete list) have been introducing cutting-edge models at very competitive prices that pros are buying ever more. Pentax and the M43 alliance also offer a very attractive selection of lenses often in two ranges of brightness, size and price. I just pre-ordered the Pentax K70 which, for $650, is a real powerhouse in a truly small package. I also work with the Oly E-M10II and E-M5II. As a photographer and an engineer, I believe that the ratio of features, built quality, ergonomics and price of these cameras is hard to beat. I suspect that the DPR people are being "nice" in this review out of respect for the deservingly illustrious Canon name.

I learned more from the comments than I did in the article. The T6 is just a T5 with wifi, digic 4+ (which brings ISO expanded 12,800 with it) and a less archaic rear screen. Am I missing anything? Even a small anything?

The Pentax S2 is a remarkable little beast though. It really seems to dominate this segment.

Sony a68 has 79 AF points, 1300D has only 9 ...Sony a68 has 1080p60, 1300D has only 1080p30 ...Sony a68 has ultra fast LIVE VIEW, 1300D has it ultra slow ... Sony a68 has several dedicated buttons, 1300D has these settings in MENU ...Sony a68 has in body stabilization, 1300D only in some lenses ...Similar for Nikon D3300 ... which sane person chooses these Nikon and Canon cameras over Sony a68?

I think thats very unfair comparison between 1300D/T6s and A68. A68 is target for intermediate. 1300D/T6s is beginner. I think 80D vs A68 would be a lot more fair comparison. While 7D Mark II vs A77 is also a fair comparison.

Here in the UK the A68 + Kit is £499, the Canon 1300d + kit £318,the D3300 + kit £298 . The Nikon D5500 +kit at £530. The Sony is larger and heavier than any of the alternativeshttp://camerasize.com/compact/#580,640,ha,f

It depends on what you need the camera for. I have a Sony a6000 as well, and it's my to-go camera. But not everyone can comfortably use an EVF because it's exhausting to your eyes, and some people like myself dislike shooting using the rear LCD, so a viewfinder is a must.

Plus a DSLR is more rugged and has much better battery life if you're travelling off the beaten path for a few days without being able to charge your batteries. The Canon 100D and Nikon D5500 are both very small cameras, more so with the Nikon's collapsible kit lens, so they're not that much more difficult to carry than a mirrorless if you're only packing the kit lens and one other walkabout prime, or a super zoom.

naththo, you really think the 18mp canon sensor from nearly a decade ago which isn't even quite APS-C sized is going to have better high ISO performance than a modern Sony 24mp APS-C sensor with a -0.3 EV light loss in front of it? Really?

mosc, who cares, its the beginner camera who do not expect stupidly higher dynamic range, posh colour look, and excellent high iso noise. This is just a cheap camera, what do you expect?

Perhaps you need to respect people who are just beginner, no need to brag or become disrespectful toward beginner people. I respect them and they can choose cheaper camera as they are more comfortable with and improve their photography skills then later on if they feel they need better camera they upgrade the skill then they do that later. They are not interesting in fancy camera when they are just starting to learn how to take photos at first.

I don't think it matters either. You were the one who brought up a "more noisy image". I was meerly explaining that the technology difference between the A68 and the T6 is so extreme that the -0.3EV light loss will NOT contribute more noise when comparing directly between them. I agree the A68 will have more noise than a D7200 mostly due to the SLT. I do not agree it will have more noise than a T6. I also agree, it's an irrelevant difference. The AF speed however is probably relevenat. The T6's AF system, sensor, and it's kit lens are all archaic (exact same as T5). The more powerful processor in the T6 vs the T5 expands the ISO range but does little in terms of noise. This was true years ago when DIGIC4+ arrived. It offers a lot less than the DIGIC5 you'd get in a T4i or an SL1 let alone the DIGIC6 you'd get in the similarly named T6i.

DPR by their own admission find the two and a half year old Nikon D3300 pretty well wins in all situations here.But then the EOS 1300D has Wi-Fi which according to this DPR review makes it the best ????

At Thanksgiving, I pulled out my DSLR. I attached the flash. However, after less than 20 shots, the flash died (I forgot to charge the batteries). I then cranked up the ISO, and felt that I'd have decent results to share in a day or two. Meanwhile, the youngsters were firing away with their smartphones which shots were immediately posted to a gallery that was shared with everyone present. The shots were good enough, and we all enjoyed the pictures in real time.

So, yes, Wi-Fi--because beginners might actually use the camera instead of their smart phones--makes an entry-level camera unequivocally better than one without.

But it's not strictly necessary. There are now SD memory cards (Eye-Fi being the most prominent) that generate a wireless hotspot so that you can transfer photos to your phone even if you're using a camera that doesn't have built-in Wi-fi. As long as you're using a compatible camera, there's no real drawback either. You can disable the hotspot when not in use to reduce battery consumption, and it otherwise behaves just like a regular SD card. And since it's a memory card, it's interchangeable across cameras should you need to use a different camera.

About the only real drawback is it's SD card only, so you can't use it on older CF card based bodies.

@FRANCISQUAN can you point me to where we say the 1300D is 'the best' by virtue of its built-in Wi-Fi? The sizable paragraph in the conclusion comparing the two basically states that the D3300 outstrips the T6 in most respects, except built-in Wi-Fi.

Honestly trying to see where you felt we were biased on this one. It all looks pretty straightforward to me.

@thermidor wifi SD cards are slow, small, expensive, and eat away at battery life like no other.

I had a Eye-Fi pro 16gb that I used on my A57. It significantly reduced battery life on the camera and copying pics was very slow. The A57 has an option to disable wifi, but not all cameras have that feature.

I agree it's not perfect and dependent on supported camera models, but it's improving. Most people only need a 2mp image for social media sharing anyway, so that should only take a few seconds to transfer out of the camera.

For myself, having wifi is nice, but I'd use it more as a remote trigger than file transfer.

@BarnET, I mean the remove trigger is essentially what I'd use the wifi feature for if it has one, but to be honest, I almost never shoot by remote anyway. The only times I find wifi transfer to be really useful is when I'm photographing an event, and they want me to post up some live coverage pictures on Instagram or Facebook. Otherwise, I don't even use it to transfer my files out.

I'm afraid the camera is pretty much designed with the ignorant consumer in mind. I'd always advocate someone getting a previous generation Rebel, like the 700D than getting a 1000D series camera.

I named Eye-Fi as an example. Other SD card manufacturers, particularly Sandisk are already coming up with their own equivalents. They're also becoming much cheaper now that it's not that much more expensive than a regular SD card of the same capacity.

@FRANCISQUAN my apologies! You are of course entitled to your opinion, and I am sorry for misinterpreting your comments. Thank you for clarifying for me. It can sometimes be difficult to discern tone on these comment threads.

I wish Canon would come up with a successor to the 100D. It's a far better beginner's camera than a 1000D series. All they need to do is deepen the hand grip and update the sensor, and if they can give it Dual Pixel live view as well, it'd be outstanding.

Yep, just one more thing to keep track of--or to remember to take--on an outing or trip.

Unless an add-on adds significant value over a built-in (e.g., an external flash that provides far more flexibility, control, and power), then it is always inferior to having that capability built into the camera's feature set.

@BanET, I agree in theory, but it would also make the camera significantly more expensive. If Canon can put an 80D sensor on a replacement 100D and give it the 19-point all cross type AF system on their Rebel line and keep it around the same price, it'd be a winner.

I switched from Canon APS-C to Nikon full frame last year, but two things that Canon is doing far better than Nikon are touchscreen interface, and live view speed and accuracy. Consumer level shooters tend to want to use live view shooting and capturing videos, so Dual Pixel AF would really give it an edge over the Nikon D3300 or D5500.

Though the 100D used the older hydrid AF, it focused faster and more accurately in live view than my current Nikon D750. Plus the 100D uses the newer STM kit lens, which is arguably one of the best kit lenses available, while the 1300D uses the older model.

No seriously, review the camera! Do what dpr used to do! They've gotten lazy and have gone from a content generator to a news aggregator. I used to come for the in DEPTH reviews. Getting this superficial summary in under 4 pages is why I don't come here much anymore.

Yet those middle pages were what made DPR unique - they were a review of what the camera could do and how it handled without actually handling the camera. Not someone's impression of the camera, but tests, charts, graphs, etc... I can get an impression anywhere. Caneralabs, The Digital Picture, even Ken Rockwell can write an impression article. DxO only tells me how the sensor works (obfuscated behind their measurements).

I'm sad to see this being the direction taken. DPR used to be a phenomenal database and encyclopedia of cameras. This direction makes it a mere webzine of fluff, fanboys, and forums.

Our goal is to continue to include this information, but present it in a different way. Hopefully our recent reviews (the T6 review is an unusually short one, but this reflects its market position and specification) are easier to digest.

It's easy to miss (and a lot of people do) but our studio test widget stands in for several standalone 'middle' pages, that we used to create laboriously in the past. Shooting a single test chart allows us to demonstrate noise, sharpness, resolution, Raw/JPEG differences, dynamic range and high ISO image quality, for example.

Point being - those middle pages that made us 'unique' were severely underperforming in terms of traffic, and took an age to put together. And as with the new (ish) suite of studio tests that you'll see in current reviews we're committed to finding ways of speeding up the entire process while continuing to deliver value.

The most consistent reviews feedback we get from readers is they want more of them. Reviews. Not pages.

We use ACR as a baseline benchmark for comparison across all cameras. As far as poor focus, I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're seeing. All cameras are focused in magnified live view, and there's distinct aliasing on the text above the center target when you look in the 'Raw' mode. 'JPEG' isn't a great way to compare sharpness because of the different JPEG engines among cameras - some are simply more sophisticated than others.

And TBH, the people buying this camera probably wouldn't notice those errors because I fully expect the target audience to skip over that page and read the conclusion instead.

And even naive users of this cam will likely play with saturation, focus and sharpening, but you did not modify saturation (can not tell about other factors) in the review - so much is left to the naive user to trudge thru and be confused about - you/DPR should LEAD naive/new users non confuse.

I viewed both jpeg and raw, and do NOT see a great focus, or maybe it is the defaults of ACR (new, naive users will NOT be using ACR but the nice Canon 'free' software-don't you think?).

So objectively and honestly you fail the intended users of this cam in several ways - not showing how cam can be modified for pic IQ and NOT using the DEFAULT s/w likely used !

So you mix the 'metaphors' in your review, wile contending you are reviewing for intended audience of cam, but are you?

So I for one get a bit confused if reviews are for intended audience of cam or just DPR 'experts'.

Yes yes yes, I know you can not use the given s/w for all cams, as an excuse, but actually you could, yes?

I'm sorry you're not seeing great focus, but by this standard, it is. Aliasing on the text indicates that critical focus has been achieved. In fact, I see better detail here on the T6 than the other cameras compared there.

And yes, you're quite right that some users will play with saturation and sharpening (focus?), but we still say in the conclusion, "It produces very nice, punchy JPEGs that you can share easily thanks to built-in Wi-Fi."

But I'm not convinced that we need to regurgitate settings in the menus and manual for the average user that will happily click away in 'green box' mode and will get results with saturation and sharpness that will compare well to the punchy photos most phones produce - but the photos from this camera will be of much higher quality.

As I stated, since we already use ACR as a baseline (Canon also happens to be well-supported with it), we don't use manufacturers' software unless there's something paradigm-shifting to be gained with it (like SilkyPix for the Pentax K-1 pixel shift mode). There are only so many hours in the day, and there are always more reviews to be written.

In the end, yes - this review was largely biased toward the intended audience of this camera.

I guess my main point is that if we are aiming to have a comprehensive database, which we are, then it makes sense to have a baseline for comparison that is at least compatible with all camera brands and is (hopefully) not intentionally biased against one or another.

But in principle, I think you are right - if people who are using this camera want to start editing their photos, then yes they are likely to use Canon's own software. In terms of bandwidth, though, it is difficult to make a business case for us spending the extra time comparing included software when we have already used our baseline software in ACR.

"Canon's entry-level Rebel is a very affordable $500 with kit lens. It's not at the head of its class in terms of technology, but does its budget-friendly price tag make up for that? Well, that depends on what you're looking for"...

My first inclination is to scoff at the 9 pt AF system, but considering you get a $200 lens with it, essentially paying $300 for this camera isn't as bad. I'd still rather buy an older model (7D, D7000, D300) for barely more, but owell.

How is it a $200 lens? Write a letter to B&H man, that's what they have it listed as. I agree i would rather have the STM but that's besides the point. Plenty of kit lenses are mediocre and i don't think anybody buying this camera will be looking for L glass.

What's going on with this review? i dont think ive ever seen DPR devote so much space telling people why they should not buy a camera, and try to convince people to shift to mirrorless instead, several times. The tone is super snarky, so it's hard to tell whether to take the reviewer seriously or not.

DPR has stopped hiding their ML love for a while now. I don't think it's malicious bias necessarily, but i do think they believe ML is the future so they support it. I personally don't agree so it annoys me too to see the bias in play. But then again, i don't put much emphasis on their reviews anymore.

If i want a review without bias, the best bet now is TCS, Digital Rev or the Northrups.

Think of it like a Consumer Reports review of a mediocre automobile. They will diligently test everything, but they can't in good conscience recommend it when there are such superior options available from the competition - sometimes even at a lower price.

When you're peering through a tiny, dim 0.53x (equivalent) magnification pentamirror OVF with only 95% coverage, a whopping 3 fps burst rate, and just 9-autofocus points, it's hard to think of the "SLR" part of the system as anything but a curse. None of the advantages you find in higher-end DSLR systems are present here.

I agree that it is strange that DPReview would suggest that people look at a small mirrorless with far more capabilities for the same or lower price, when consumers could purchase the larger and less capable DSLR instead. I'm also curious why they don't review or suggest film cameras, which still work and perform perfectly well.

I agree cameron. Many of us have been wondering similar things for years, like why suggest a system with inferior AF, flash system, lens selection and battery life when we know a camera purchase is really a system purchase. I guess some things just don't make sense.

I would guess this Canon AF system is worse than most mirrorless in its comparable class. Not sure why you would think a mirrorless would have an inferior flash system. Doesn't really have anything to do with a mirror. Most sony mirroless cameras you can tilt the flash up with your finger and bounce it. Works really well. Fuji and Sony have a good selection of lenses at good prices in this class.

For most a camera purchase is not a system purchase. This is a three year own and then toss aside camera. Very few turn out like us and have a passion for photography and want to invest into a system.

I don't even like referring people to by ILC any more. They never take it out of auto, never change the lens, and end up leaving it at home because it is too big and their phone takes the same pics in good light. They end up wasting their money.

Note i said "for years", as in the past. ML still haven't caught up to Canikon. It's not just the bodies either, which at first seems like a good thing but when you realize only the newest and most expensive lenses are good for fast tracking, it sinks in. Samsung was the same way, if you wanted decent tracking you had to sell a kidney to pay for the glass.

On the flip side one can buy a lower end Canikon body with a kit zoom and keep up with all but the fastest moving subjects. Canon's $299 55-250 STM IS is a monster for the price. As for this 9 pt system, it's basic for sure but i don't ONLY judge an AF system by the number of points. What good is having 1200 AF points if none of them can keep up?

I bet the center point on this new Rebel is still as good or better than the vast majority of ML bodies.

@brendon, Canon has great quality and affordable apsc glass, and DSLR users don't tend to cry themselves to sleep when they gotta use a heavier lens, which means FF glass is available too (not that all FF lenses are huge, look at the Canon 40mm 2.8).

I wasn't trying to set off an avalanche of snark, but this IS the DPR comments section, so... my point was just that this review felt 'off.' i get that this isn't the most technologically-advanced camera, but the reviewer abandons the description of the camera at several points in the review to make a sales pitch for mirrorless. that's just weird. i mean, why even review it in the first place?

My first guess is the reviewer was a girl, and they often prefer what might be considered small cameras. Not to mention, fashion symbols. There's no denying, ML is more popular with the ladies (not to say some women don't like DSLRs).

That sounds kinda sexist and gender-biased. The review didnt say the camera was too big, either, so that's kind of a reach as well. I know plenty of female photographers who use DSLRs, as well as many men who use mirrorless, so i cant put much stock in that comment.

if we're going by numbers, mirrorless cameras sell far better in Asia than anywhere else. I personally would not make a generalization about what women prefer, especially when it's not qualifiable by anything other than subjective opinion. To argue that a female reviewer wrote her review based on a gender-based preference, and not from subjective criteria, is the very definition of sexism. I don't see that the entry-level DSLR market is slanted toward male buyers; it's ridiculous to assert that. What i'm commenting on is the curiosity of reviewing a camera and making a sales pitch for other cameras several times within the course of the review. Which has nothing to do with gender whatsoever. I can appreciate a reviewer pointing out that there are other options within the price range, but this one was rather emphatic about that, which in my opinion distracted from the actual review of the camera.

and is by the far the worst sensor on the market. every other manufacturer uses the newest and best sensor in all of their camera lineup. only canon deliberately cripples their lower end models and hopes uninformed people will buy...

Well, not really. Most of the manufacturers use the newest sensors only in the higher end models. And it's a matter of time till they get to the lower models, usually new higher end models with new sensors are already available or at lease announced/rumored but that time... Canon is just moving much slower than others.

Fuji is still using the 16mp sensor that has been around for a while in almost all of their cameras. Just the xpro2 and soon to be xt2 have a newer sensor. The x70 still uses the 16mp sensor. So canon is not the only manufacturer to stick with a certain sensor.

just to clarify - yes, other manufacturers use older sensors in their current lineup but when a new sensor hits the market in some of their top models they use that sensor in all of their new cameras. unlike canon that recycles old tech time after time even tho they have new generation of sensors.@osan - man, you are just mad cause I am right, right? :) Not hating Canon. I think their 80D is a wonderful camera. just stating the obvious - they deliberately cripple their lower line models and other manufacturers have much more capable cameras in the same price range.

Claiming that they deliberately cripple is a very sane statement Hellraiser. You should run canon by yourself you seem to know everything. "Deliberately crippling" might actually be cost cutting thus producing cheaper DSLR's for people who can afford it and don't stare at the pixels in front of a screen all day. Horses for courses. If you think it's not god enough for you move on.

It isn't cost cutting when other manufacturers can make better cameras at same price range. Its not about pixel peeping, The differences in colour bit depth (banding), and over 1 bit of dynamic range loss are very visible. even if you shrink the final output.You are right there. I have considered all manufacturers when choosing gear and other ones gave far better performance per money. So I'm just sharing my opinion here. Some will find it useful, some will not :)

Hellraiser, that is not true: "...when a new sensor hits the market in some of their top models they use that sensor in all of their new cameras."

Here, some simple examples, and probably if you really din in you can find some more examples: * Fuji A line cameras uses cheaper sensors * Nikon D750 (not to mention also lower end shutter)* Panasonic introduced 20MPx sensor with their GX8 one year ago, however the new cameras use the old sensor (GX85, GF8)

So yes, it's about cost cutting but also marketing, making the high end models stand out more. It also is about pixel peeping, a person wanting a 3-4-500$ camera plus lens wouldn't care much about 1bit of color depth, one step of DR and so on... look and feel of the camera is more important, and for a lot of people brand recognition.

I had a friend who recently bought a camera and asked me what canon to buy... I explained him that he could buy better/smaller/nicer camera with that money but he just wanted a canon...

You joke but the RX100m4 does 16fps. It's notable for the same price of the T6 and a kit lens you can still get an original RX100. The lens on the RX100 has a larger physical aperture at 28mm despite it's much smaller size, higher resolution, 1080 60p video, and surprisingly comparable high ISO performance evne with the sensor size disadvantage.

I do wish reviewers would drop the word "plasticky", however. That's just lazy reviewing. ALL cameras have lots of plastic inside. About 70% of new aircraft are also "plastic"--including most of the wings.

"Plastic" is also a meaningless term if you're going to use it to describe carbon-fiber epoxy laminates. It's like saying that your car is durable because it's made of metal, even though it happens to be aluminum foil from the kitchen.

Typically, these bodies use injection-moulded glass-reinforced thermoplastics with the glass already in the pellets as a stiffener. Really quite durable - and very affordable to mass produce - its true, but in a different league entirely from the continuous fiber layups required to do lightweight structural composites.

"Plasticky" isn't so much about the materials, but more about how well the plastic shell is braced by the underlying structural frame, how precise the buttons and switches feel, how tightly the pieces fit together, and the quality of the finish overall.

Historically Nikon has done a better job at making their cheap plastic cameras feel slightly less like cheap plastic cameras than Canon. Not that that's anything to brag about, I note it merely as an observation. Nikon bodies generally feel solid, and the matt, non-slip finish does not show scratches so easily. Perversely my D600 as a definite flex around the base of the grip around the battery door, making it feel cheaper in the hand than a D60. Go figure.

"In short, with the T6, Canon has gathered up various components it had lying around on the shelf from Rebels past and put them together in an aggressively priced bundle."

In case you hadn't noticed, that's been Canon's way to build camera equipment for a very long time -- no more than one or two "new" things in any model. It is why CHDK and ML can work, and it gives their products very low engineering and parts cost... and I bet their profit margin is decent even on this $500 model. Note that the bundles place the 75-300mm at $50 price!

I am not, indeed, sure whether it is not true to say that I do not seem unlikely to not buy this even if perchance I did not happen upon an unfortuitous occasion in which I were not paid to not buy it.

I think people may well Google for a review, plus the review is about the right length and level for prospective purchasers, so a worthwhile effort. Plus all the Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Pony/m43 fan-boy arguing in the comments section does wonders for the page-views and revenue...

This is rather a disappointing superficial review. Actually the kit zooms (said to use Sigma made element cells, like the similar kit zooms fitted to Nikon and Pentax SLRs) are pretty good and perform extremely well for the money. That said, the EOS 1300D has little to offer over the compact EOS 100D which comes with the newer STM lens that has a faster silent focus and non-rotating front element making a polariser usable. Check out the 100D if you are looking for a budget SLR and I would add that the 18-55 STM lens is better made than its predecessor and (IMO) the similar lens supplied with the Nikon D3300.

Wha.... Nikon the only alternative??? What about all the recent Pentax offerings at the entry level price point? Every one has a real pentaprism finder rather than a vile, dark tunnel with a tiny image at the end called a 'pentamirror' viewfinder as used by C/N in all their low-buck DSLR models.

The A5100 is another $100 (T5i/700D) and the A6000 another $200 (both cheapest kit with a lens) plus you don't get a viewfinder. Frankly for £500 I'd say if you don't need WiFi get a D5200, but modern social media means WiFi is much more of a plus to the target customers than some people seem to think. At an event where light is too low for the phone, take a picture with this, zap onto phone and then Facebook. No WiFi then do it tomorrow morning (or late at night if can be bothered).

Canon has announced its latest entry-level DSLR, the Rebel T6 (also known as the EOS 1300D). While the T6 shares many features with its predecessor (the T5/1200D), it has a faster Digic 4+ processor, higher resolution LCD, new 'white priority' white balance mode, and Wi-Fi with NFC. Read more

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Professional commercial photographer Moe Lauchert shares an incredible gallery of film photographs he captured on Ilford HP5 with a Nikonos 5 while serving as a diver at NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory in Houston, Texas.

We've been shooting with a beta version of the Sony a9's upcoming firmware 5.0. While there's much more analysis to come, we can say it makes for a dead simple AF tracking user experience. Take a look at some of our samples.

The Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 is a compact and light-weight lens for full-frame Canon and Nikon DSLRs. We took it on grand tour of Seattle's top tourist spots and found it makes a pleasant, albeit wide, walking around lens.

Fujifilm has announced its new GF 100-200mm F5.6 R LM OIS WR tele-zoom lens. The lens, equivalent to 79-158mm when mounted on a GFX camera, has image stabilization (with a claimed 5 stops of shake reduction), a linear AF motor and weather-sealing.

Amongst all of the camera news yesterday, Sony also announced its new Imaging Edge mobile app, which replaces PlayMemories Mobile. Three desktop applications have also been updated, adding support for time-lapse movie creation.

Our intrepid team is in San Diego, for the launch of the new Sony a6400. In this short overview video, Carey, Chris and Jordan talk through the main specifications of the new camera, and what they might mean for photographers and videographers.

The Sony a6400 is the company's new midrange mirrorless camera, whose standout features include an advanced autofocus system, flip-up touchscreen LCD and oversampled 4K footage with Log support. Learn more as we go hands-on with the a6400.

Sony has announced major firmware updates for the a7R III, a7 III and a9. All three cameras gain improved Eye-AF, the ability to recognize and focus on animals' eyes, and timelapse capability. The a9 gets more sophisticated subject tracking.